Metonym In Film

Metaphor and metonymy could build a strong imagery of alienation in films

The study revealed that TV Chandran has used a wide array of metonymy and metaphors in all the films selected for the study to image the concept of alienation. Metaphor is so widespread that it is often used as an 'umbrella ' term to include other figures of speech like metonyms which can be technically distinguished from it in its narrower usage. Lakoff and Johnson argue that 'the essence of metaphor is understanding and experiencing one kind of thing in terms of another. Furthermore, metaphors need not be verbal, and in films, a pair of consecutive shots is metaphorical when there is an implied comparison of the two shots. These visual metaphors in films can also

Lakoff and Johnson also note that metaphors may differ from culture to culture but argue that they are not arbitrary, being derived initially from our physical, social and cultural experience, whereas metonymy is a function which includes using one signified to stand for another signified which is directly or closely associated with it. Moreover, metonyms are based on various indexical relationships between signifieds, notably the replacement of effect for cause. When compared with metaphors, metonyms may be visual as well as verbal. In film, which Jakobson regarded as a basically metonymic medium, 'metonymy can be applied to an object that is visibly present but which represents another object or subject to which it is related but which is absent ' (Hayward, 1996).The indexicality of metonyms also tends to propose that they are 'directly connected to ' reality in contrast to the mere iconicity or symbolism of metaphor. TV Chandran has predominately used metonyms to bestow a 'grounded experience ' to the viewers by visualizing the protagonists’ anguish, fear, worries, fantastical liberation, mental agony and stereotypical lives in experiencing alienation than metaphors as they usually involve direct associations (Lakoff & Johnson 1980).

These ideologies are seen as universal, though they actually only benefit the ruling class. TV Chandran’s film saw the dominant consumerist culture and class dominance as the ruling ideology that repressed sub-proletariat cultures. Moreover, TV Chandran’s films remind us to investigate established norms and institutions rather than considering it as a natural phenomenon. Like the Italian film maker, Pier Paolo Pasolini, TV Chandran thought that the best way to learn is through the lessons of life and reality, and believes in the revolutionary role of the Indian peasantry. As a Marxist, he found the need for “cultural hegemony” to make the viewer understand about the existing class struggles in the society. Marxist beliefs based on humanitarianism made TV Chandran to make films on the subjugation of protagonists under religious fundamentalism, class hierarchy, and apoliticism. Furthermore, TV Chandran viewed social and political alienation as one of the greatest problems in the State, and was greatly moved by the fact that the underprivileged and oppressed are condemned to forgo their identity to the dominance ruling class. This approach is evident in films like, Danny, Ponthan Mada and Padam Onnu